Exploration Techniques at the Thorn Ag‐Au‐Cu High‐Sulfidation Epithermal Prospect, Northern British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The Thorn prospect is an El Indio‐style high‐sulfidation epithermal prospect in a little‐explored belt of Late Cretaceous subaerial volcanics and subvolcanic intrusions in northwestern British Columbia, Canada. More than 30 massive sulfide (pyrite‐enargite‐tennantite/tetrahedrite) veins, quartz‐sulfide (quartz‐pyrite‐enargite‐tennantite/tetrahedrite) veins and quartz‐vuggy silica‐alunite veins/breccias fill ENE fractures and faults over an area of 1,600 times 1,900 m. They are hosted within a Late Cretaceous feldspar‐quartz‐biotite granodioritic porphyry stock and flanked by alteration envelopes a few meters to tens of meters wide: an inner envelope of intense sericite‐clay‐pyrite and an outer one of weak clay‐sericite‐chlorite. Where several veins are close together, the sericite‐clay‐pyrite alteration envelopes coalesce into zones up to 150 m wide. The most successful exploration techniques have been prospecting, silt and soil geochemistry, airborne magnetic and electromagnetic surveys and diamond drilling. Silt and soil geochemical anomalies for Au, Ag, As, Cu, Pb, Sb and Zn mark the known veins and indicate prospective areas where veins have not yet been discovered. Magnetics and resistivity outline the gross property‐wide structure and lithologies. Most of the sericite‐clay‐pyrite alteration and known veins are outlined by the <264 ohm‐m resistivity contour, which covers an area of 800 times 2,300 m. Weak EM conductors are thought to represent undiscovered massive sulfide and quartz‐sulfide veins, and their flanking sericite‐clay‐pyrite alteration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".